$360 is the new fee for excessive calls to police

The Costa Mesa council explains how it arrived at the figure as it votes to impose the cost on the city's problem motels.

Following a vote Tuesday by the Costa Mesa City Council, some motel owners in the city could find themselves wondering whether a call to the police to report rowdy guests or criminal activity is worth the $360 it could cost them for taking up officers' time.

In voting to officially set that dollar amount Tuesday night, the Costa Mesa City Council ironed out another detail of the city's "Excessive Use of Resources" ordinance, which was passed earlier this month.

The ordinance aims to recover costs from motel and hotel operators who, council members have said, essentially use police as onsite security, racking up expensive hours of work to solve problems on their property.

Therefore, the ordinance says, lodging operators who call police to report "nuisance activities" more than an average of 0.4 times per room per month should reimburse the city. Calls alerting police to domestic violence or summoning fire or ambulance services are excluded.

Managers and owners of motels facing the council majority's ire say the ordinance will make them think twice before calling police and that this could have dire consequences in a tense situation. Others have raised concerns that the ordinance unfairly targets motels and hotels, while certain bars and apartment complexes also require a good deal of police attention.

The $360, a city staff report said, was arrived at by dividing the annual Police Department budget — about $40.2 million — by annual calls for service, minus routine patrol checks and 9-1-1 calls that were canceled, unfounded or otherwise unnecessary to log.

That yielded an initial estimate of $515 per call, from which city staff subtracted 30% to "counteract charges" for police work unrelated to responding to calls.

Councilwoman Sandy Genis said she was dissatisfied with what Assistant City CEO Rick Francis explained was more of an estimation than a scientific calculation.

Tracking the outcome of each police call would have taken massive amounts of staff time, he said, which in turn would have cost money. Costa Mesa police and city staff have in the past declined to estimate how much each call to motels costs, saying too many factors are at play.

Still, Genis said, $360 appears to be a "kind of a seat-of-the-pants number, and I want a real number."

She said the idea that only 30% of the Police Department's budget was spent on activities unrelated to actively responding to calls was further evidence that it is understaffed.

Mayor Pro Tem Steve Mensinger called it a matter of proportion — that certain motels take up an undue amount of police time and refuse to make changes to their operations that would stop them from attracting potentially problematic guests.

The resolution passed 3 to 1, with Genis voting against it. Councilwoman Wendy Leece was absent.

*

A modest staffing increase

In other business, the council voted unanimously to increase city staffing levels, authorizing the hiring of 12 employees and boosting the city's annual payroll by $1.64 million.

Four of the positions are sworn police officers, whose duties would include helping to monitor prisoners released early under the state's prison realignment program and registered sex offenders living in Costa Mesa.

City CEO Tom Hatch told the council that it has been tough to maintain the high standard of work with a staff that has been cut by about 150 members over the past four years. Nevertheless, he said, keeping a tight rein on spending remains a top priority.

Council members and members of the public lauded the move as a step in the right direction for a city that has seen years of fierce debate over austerity proposals, including efforts to reduce the city's pension liability.

Recently, a Daily Pilot investigation found that the Police Department had been having trouble filling existing vacancies, with few officers seeking transfers to Costa Mesa.

Facebook comments are not regularly monitored by Daily Pilot staff. If you believe a comment violates any of the below rules, please email Editor John Canalis at john.canalis@latimes.com and Web Editor Ann Haley at ann.haley@latimes.com. Staff will review and remove offending comments during working hours, 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Friday.

The Daily Pilot reserves the right to remove, block or refuse any comment for any reason. When posting to DailyPilot.com, you agree to not provide comments that:

* are defamatory, threatening, disparaging, grossly inflammatory, false, misleading, fraudulent, inaccurate, unfair, contains gross exaggeration or unsubstantiated claims, violate the privacy rights of any third party, are unreasonably harmful or offensive to any individual or community.

* discriminate on the grounds of race, religion, national origin, gender, age, marital status, sexual orientation or disability, or refer to such matters in any manner prohibited by law.

* "flame" any individual or entity (e.g., sends repeated messages related to another user and/or make derogatory or offensive comments about another individual), or repeat prior posting of the same message under multiple threads or subjects.

* violate or encourage the violation of any municipal, state, federal or international law, rule, regulation or ordinance.

* advertise, promote or offer to trade any goods or services, except in areas specifically designated for such purpose.

*contain copyrighted or other proprietary material of any kind without the express permission of the owner of that material.

* violate any right of dailypilot.com or any third party.

* upload or transmit viruses or other harmful, disruptive or destructive files, material or code.